It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sheriff Joe to run for Governor?

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

madmac5150
I find it amusing that his most vociferous detractors don't even live in Arizona. You can't fully comprehend the problems with illegal immigration in the state of Arizona unless you have lived there. The feds dislike Sheriff Joe because he took it upon himself to start enforcing immigration laws... where the feds have failed miserably. It is all politics, and Obama and his minions will keep going after him... but the man has never once backed down from the feds. Arizona has some of the best sheriffs you will find anywhere (minus Pima County...); Sheriff Mack has stuck it to the feds several times. Arizonan's love personal freedom, and as long as the feds try to mess with the freedoms of those people, people like Sheriff Arpaio and Sheriff Mack will take them to task.


You mean the white Arizonans that the Sheriff's department leaves alone loves them his brand of justice?
Because the volume of lawsuits and settlements seems to drown out everything else.
And no...my family chose not to live in Maricopa when we had the chance due to Sheriff Joe and the wanton disregard for justice. I have a tan. And long hair. I might as well grab some pink underwear and a bologna sandwich if I had a hankering for some justice.
Mericopa...'Merica...




posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

buster2010

madmac5150
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 

Spoken like a true Obama kool-aid drinker... Arpaio has something the idiots in DC haven't figured out yet. Common sense.


Nazi Joe is a racist that thinks he should have the ability to violate the Constitution and deny citizens their rights whenever he likes. And if you think he is such a great guy maybe you should do a little checking into his background like how he helped to set up drug routes when he was head of the DEA in Arizona.


Just trade out Nazi Joe for Socialist Obama and you've got the same thing. So it's not the actions of the leaders, it's the party affiliation. Got it.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by madmac5150
 


Yet another opportunity for an Arizona Governor fail and/or impeachment.

I think Arizonans are smarter than that; Mecham and Symington weren't that long ago.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Gotta love the general view ATS has towards Arpaio. They complain about how every politician is corrupt but somehow Arpaio gets a buy even though he is one of the most blatantly corrupt.

Sure everyone knows about Tent City but why do his supporters never mention the luxury prison he had built for his friends and celebrities?

Why do his supporters never discuss the abysmally low clearance rate when it comes to rape?

Why do his supporters always try to pin the Feds investigation of him on Obama when it goes back to at least Bush?

Why does he arrest political rivals and even people who criticize him on trumped up charges only to have them dropped when they give Joe what he wants?

I can keep going. One could easily create an entire thread based around Arpaio's history of corruption. If he were actually elected governor then my advice would be to get out of the state and avoid it at all costs.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by The Vagabond
 


Those lawsuits are troubling. Maricopa County has shelled out around $50 million during Arpiao's reign, and that is just in settlement money. who knows how much the legal fees ran to, not to mention the county insurance premiums escalating from all of this. So despite the good sheriff's trumpeting he really hasn't been that cost effective for our county.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   

madmac5150
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 

Spoken like a true Obama kool-aid drinker... Arpaio has something the idiots in DC haven't figured out yet. Common sense.


Whaa? Man I just don't what to make of that statement? This man has killed people be not proving water in his tent jails. This guy wipes his ass with the constitution! Just because he does not like Obama does not make him a good choice here!

In June 2008, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) began an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.[12] In March 2009, the United States Department of Justice notified Arpaio that they were investigating the department for civil rights violations, in unfairly targeting Hispanics and Spanish-speaking people.[13] The DOJ found "reasonable cause to believe that MCSO engages in a pattern or practice of violating the Constitution and laws of the United States" and that "MCSO is broken".[12]

In October 2009, it was reported that the FBI was investigating Arpaio for using his position to settle political vendettas.[14][dead link]

In January 2010, it was reported that the Department of Justice has impaneled a grand jury to investigate allegations of abuse of power by Arpaio.[15][dead link]

In March 2010, it was reported that an investigation into Arpaio is "serious and ongoing", according to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.[16][dead link]

Jail conditions[edit]

A federal judge ruled, in October 2008, that conditions in Maricopa County jails violate the constitutional rights of inmates.[17] In April, 2010, the same judge ruled that conditions in the Maricopa County jails continue to violate the constitutional rights of inmates.[18]

Contempt citation of detention officer[edit]

The Maricopa County Court House
In October 2009, a courtroom video was posted on YouTube, showing an MCSO Detention Officer removing documents from a defense attorney's files.[19] Deputy [20] Adam Stoddard was subsequently found in contempt-of-court for violating attorney–client privilege, and ordered to hold a press conference, to publicly apologize for his actions.[21] On the deadline set by the court, Deputy Stoddard, under orders from Sheriff Joe Arpaio,[22][23] declined to apologize and was jailed. Arpaio argued that only he could order his deputies actions and the court had no authority to enforce any action against a deputy, a position that the Appeals Court rejected in Stoddard's appeal. The Appeals Court did order that Judge Donahoe's order to make an apology be stricken and replaced with a fine.[24][25] The next day, 20 MCSO detention officers failed to report for work at the downtown Phoenix Superior Court, and a bomb threat was called in, causing the building to be evacuated. The same afternoon, more than 150 deputies and detention officers gathered outside the courthouse and reiterated their support for the jailed detention officer.[26] The MCSO appealed the contempt order, and pending the outcome of the appeal, the deputy was released from jail. Ultimately, the contempt-of-court ruling was upheld, however the court of appeals threw out the penalty (that the officer apologize), and sent the case back to superior court for the imposition of a fine.[27]

Controversial use of SWAT forces[edit]

On July 23, 2004, a SWAT team served a search warrant looking for "a stockpile of illegal automatic weapons and armor-piercing pistol ammunition" that they believed was hidden at an upscale home. In the course of serving the warrant, multiple tear gas cartridges were launched into the home, the result of which was the home catching fire. During the fire, SWAT forced the homeowner's 10-month-old pit bull puppy back into the home with a fire extinguisher, resulting in the dog's death. It was reported that the officers laughed over the incident. The armored personnel carrier used during the assault also ran over and damaged a neighbor's vehicle when its brakes failed. Police recovered two weapons: one antique shotgun; and one 9mm pistol. Both weapons are legal to own in Arizona. After failing to find illicit weapons the police served an arrest warrant for the owner who was also wanted on a misdemeanor warrant for failing to appear in Tempe Municipal Court on several traffic citations.[28]

Silencing critics[edit]

In 2008, when Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon called for a federal investigation into Arpaio's immigration enforcement tactics, Arpaio's office responded by demanding the mayor's emails and phone logs. Arpaio also had his critic Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley, a Republican, arrested on suspicion of failing to properly disclose business interests.[51]

Webcasts of pretrial detainees[edit]

Starting in July 2000, the Maricopa County Sheriff's website hosted Jail Cam, a 24-hour Internet webcast of images from cameras in the Madison Street Jail, a facility which processed and housed only pretrial detainees. The stated goals of the broadcasts were the deterrence of future crime and improved public scrutiny of jail procedures. The cameras showed arrestees being brought in handcuffed, fingerprinted, booked, and taken to holding cells; with the site receiving millions of hits per day.[33] Twenty-four former detainees brought suit against the Sheriff's office, arguing that their Fourteenth Amendment rights of due process had been violated.

U.S. District Court Judge Earl H. Carroll held in favor of the former detainees, issuing an injunction ending the webcasts. By a 2 to 1 vote, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction, with the majority opinion stating:
... Second, Sheriff Arpaio argues that the cameras are justified by the County’s interest in having its pretrial detention centers open to public scrutiny. We have given prison officials wide latitude in administering pretrial detention facilities, in guaranteeing detainees’ attendance at trial, and in promoting prison safety. But we fail to see how turning pretrial detainees into the unwilling objects of the latest reality show serves any of these legitimate goals. As the Supreme Court has recognized, "nmates . . . are not like animals in a zoo to be filmed and photographed at will by the public or by media reporters, however ‘educational’ the process may be for others.[70][71][dead link]
In his dissenting opinion, Circuit Judge Carlos Bea wrote:
... What the majority avoids—perhaps because of the all-too-predictable result—is to ask the question basic to any review questioning the validity of governmental action under a rational basis analysis: were the webcasts reasonably related to the purpose of deterring public behavior that could result in pretrial detention? The answer clearly is Yes. ... Similarly unexamined is the Sheriff’s purpose of providing transparency of jail operations as a civic good.Sheriff Arpaio’s methods to achieve his purposes of public deterrence and governmental transparency may not suit the fine sensibilities of some group advocates and jurists. But absent a violation of the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs—and I see none—such differences of opinion must be vindicated, if at all, in the ballot box, not in the courtroom.[71]
The US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the case. Ultimately, Maricopa County was required to pay the detainees' legal costs and damages.[72][dead link]

Inmate complaints and lawsuits[edit]

From 2004 through November 2007, Arpaio was the target of 2,150 lawsuits in U.S. District Court and hundreds more in Maricopa County courts, with more than $50 million in claims being filed,[73] 50 times as many prison-conditions lawsuits as the New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston jail systems combined.[74] Allegations of cruel treatment of inmates as well as living conditions have been cited by Amnesty International in a report issued on the treatment of inmates in Maricopa County facilities.[75]

Recidivism[edit]

In 1998, Arpaio commissioned a study, by Arizona State University criminal justice professor Marie L. Griffin, to examine recidivism rates based on conditions of confinement. Comparing recidivism rates under Arpaio to those under his predecessor, the study found "there was no significant difference in recidivism observed between those offenders released in 1989–1990 and those released in 1994–1995."[76]

Inmate deaths and injuries[edit]

Family members of inmates who have died or been injured in jail custody have filed lawsuits against the sheriff’s office. Maricopa County has paid more than $43 million in settlement claims during Arpaio's tenure.[77]

Charles Agster[edit]

In August 2001, Charles Agster, a 33-year-old mentally handicapped man, died in the county jail three days after being forced by sheriff's officers into a restraint chair used for controlling combative arrestees. Agster's parents had been taking him to a psychiatric hospital because he was exhibiting paranoia, then called police when he refused to leave a convenience store where they had stopped en route. Officers took Agster to the Madison Street jail, placed a "spit hood" over his face and strapped him to the chair, where he had an apparent seizure and lost consciousness. He was declared brain dead three days later. A medical examiner later concluded that Agster died of complications of methamphetamine intoxication. In a subsequent lawsuit, an attorney for the sheriff's office described the amount of methamphetamine in Agster's system as 17 times the known lethal dose. The lawsuit resulted in a $9 million jury verdict against the county, the sheriff's office, and Correctional Health Services.[78]
Scott Norberg[edit]

One major controversy includes the 1996 death of inmate Scott Norberg, a former Brigham Young University football wide receiver, who died while in custody of the Sheriff's office.[79] Norberg was arrested for assaulting a police officer in Mesa, Arizona, after neighbors in a residential area had reported a delirious man walking in their neighborhood.[80] Arpaio's office repeatedly claimed Norberg was also high on methamphetamine, but a blood toxicology performed post-mortem was inconclusive. According to a toxological report, Norberg did have methamphetamine in his urine, though "there would be no direct effect caused by the methamphetamine on Norberg's behavior at the time of the incident".[81] During his internment, evidence suggests detention officers shocked Norberg several times with a stun-gun. According to an investigation by Amnesty International, Norberg was already handcuffed and face down when officers dragged him from his cell and placed him in a restraint chair with a towel covering his face. After Norberg's corpse was discovered, detention officers accused Norberg of attacking them as they were trying to restrain him. The cause of his death, according to The Maricopa County Medical Examiner, was due to "positional asphyxia". Sheriff Arpaio investigated and subsequently cleared detention officers of any criminal wrongdoing.[82][dead link]

Norberg’s parents filed a lawsuit against Arpaio and his office. The lawsuit was settled for $8.25 million (USD).[83]

Richard Post[edit]

Richard Post was a paraplegic inmate arrested in 1996 for possession of marijuana and criminal trespass. Post was placed in a restraint chair by guards and his neck was broken in the process. The event, caught on video, shows guards smiling and laughing while Post is being injured.[citation needed] Because of his injuries, Post has lost much of the use of his arms.[84] Post settled his claims against the Sheriff's office for $800,000.[85]

Brian Crenshaw[edit]

Brian Crenshaw was a legally blind and mentally disabled inmate who suffered fatal injuries while being held in Maricopa County Jail for shoplifting. The injuries that led to his death were initially blamed on a fall from his bunk but were later discovered to have been the result of a brutal beating by jail guards on March 7, 2003. A lawsuit filed in The Maricopa County Superior Court of Arizona by the lawyer for Crenshaw's family stated:


An external examination report of The Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office concluded that Brian's death was caused by "complications of blunt force trauma due to a fall." This conclusion was reached largely on the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office's relation of their "history" of Brian's injuries to the Medical Examiner's Office; a history that included the MCSO's implausible story that all of Brian's injuries were caused by a fall from his cell bed. The Maricopa County Medical Examiner conducted no autopsy; nor was the Maricopa County Medical Examiner informed by MCSO or The Maricopa County Correctional Health Services about Brian's beating on March 7, 2003 and/or related events. An independent autopsy report later narrowed the cause of Brian's death to peritonitis and sepsis secondary to the duodenal perforation. A fall from Brian's 4-foot, 2 inch bunk could not have simultaneously caused a broken neck, broken toes, and a duodenal perforation.[86]

The lawsuit against Arpaio and his office resulted in an award of $2 million.[87][dead link] As in the Scott Norberg case, it was alleged that Arpaio's office destroyed evidence in the case. In the Crenshaw case, the attorney who represented the case before a jury alleged digital video evidence was destroyed.[88]

Conflicts with local news media[edit]

In July 2004, The Phoenix New Times published Arpaio's home address in the context of a story about his real estate dealings. In October, 2007, a Maricopa County special prosecutor served Village Voice Media, the Phoenix New Times' corporate parent, with a subpoena ordering it to produce "all documents" related to the original real estate article, as well as the IP addresses of all visitors to the Phoenix New Times website since January 1, 2004. The Phoenix New Times then published the contents of the subpoena on October 18.[89] Phoenix New Times editors Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin were arrested and jailed by Maricopa Sheriff's Deputies on misdemeanor charges of revealing grand jury secrets after the publication of the subpoena.[90] On the following day, the county attorney dropped the case and fired the special prosecutor.[91][92]

On November 28, 2007, it was ruled that the subpoenas were not validly issued[93] and in April 2008, the New Times editors filed suit against Arpaio, County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Special Prosecutor Dennis Wilenchik.[94]

In 2009, The East Valley Tribune ran a series of articles that criticized the Maricopa County sheriff for a decline in normal police protection due to an increased focus towards arresting illegal immigrants.[9] The five-part series titled “Reasonable Doubt,” which received a Pulitzer Prize for local reporting, described "slow emergency response times and lax criminal enforcement."[95]

On December 23, 2009, The Arizona Republic published an editorial titled “The Conspiracy that won’t stop.”[96] The Editorial Board referenced a published letter written by the Yavapai County Attorney, Sheila Polk, titled “Arpaio, Thomas are abusing power” ”[97] in which Polk was critical of Arpaio. The Editorial Board claimed that “As a result of stepping forward, Polk now may join the fast-growing list of Arizona public officials forced to defend themselves against criminal investigations for the "crime" of having upset Arpaio and Thomas.”[96]

Critical organizations[edit]

Arpaio's practices have been criticized by organizations such as Amnesty International,[75] the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, the American Jewish Committee,[98] and the Arizona chapter of the Anti-Defamation League.[99] The editorial board of The New York Times called Arpaio "America's Worst Sheriff".[100]

edit on 23-1-2014 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I am so happy I don't live in Arizona! I may live in a red state (Texas) but I could not live in a place where that man could possibly become governor.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Donkey_Dean
 


You're right... with those qualifications he should run for president...


edit on 23-1-2014 by madmac5150 because: Weird green line removal



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Donkey_Dean
 


Add a link, you will be warned for plagiarism..

The guy above me, Hell why not, he seems to be your savior apparently..



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 10:44 PM
link   

madmac5150
reply to post by Donkey_Dean
 


You're right... with those qualifications he should run for president...


edit on 23-1-2014 by madmac5150 because: Weird green line removal


You're kidding , right?

Seriously, look at the whole sb1070 fiasco. If joe would have just shut his mouth and done his job WITHIN the confines of all of the laws things would have played out differently. There is an illegal immigration problem in Arizona. Gabriel Giffords even acknowledged it. in less than 20 years we went from a population of about 80,000 to a population of about 500,000. there was widespread public sentiment and support for Az for this. Then nicklebag Joe had to plop his fat attention seeking keester right in the middle of it, damn the law, who cares if he is engaging in human rights violations, let's all look at that manly man of a sheriff, Joe Arpiao. Him and his goons became the public face of our immigration problem, and he is a big reason it may never be fixed in an equitable manner.

Joe Arpiao would be a piss poor governor and an even worse President because all he cares about is Joe Arpiao.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by azdaze
 


Joe's reaction to SB1070 was bad? Clarence "Dingbat" Dupnik in Pima County trashed SB1070 as a progressive mouth piece... when the illegals started chucking tires off of overpasses into traffic on I-19, Dupnik did absolutely nothing in what was an act of international terrorism. Liberals make horrible lawmen.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by madmac5150
 


Yes, it was bad. If you can't see how after all that has been revealed over the years then I can't make you see either.Sorry



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 09:03 AM
link   

StoutBroux

buster2010

madmac5150
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 

Spoken like a true Obama kool-aid drinker... Arpaio has something the idiots in DC haven't figured out yet. Common sense.


Nazi Joe is a racist that thinks he should have the ability to violate the Constitution and deny citizens their rights whenever he likes. And if you think he is such a great guy maybe you should do a little checking into his background like how he helped to set up drug routes when he was head of the DEA in Arizona.


Just trade out Nazi Joe for Socialist Obama and you've got the same thing. So it's not the actions of the leaders, it's the party affiliation. Got it.


If you think that then you are totally ignorant about both people and need to do a little research. Got it.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
I for one am a fan of a lot of what Sheriff Joe has done. I realize he has some skeletons in his closet but who doesn't?

He's been extremely effective as the Sheriff and has done a lot to lower crime and also rehabilitate. Some of you think that prisoners deserve a soft environment. If you're a felon, I'm all for work camps, etc.

I realize it's not a popular opinion but I'm okay with that.

Checkout this thread that I did a while back on Joe. (the pictures are great)



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by freakjive
 


Except studies have shown that under Arpaio violent crime rates have risen while they have dropped everywhere else in Arizona. On top of that in a study commissioned by Arpaio it was found that recidivism rates under him have been no different than under the previous sheriff. So at best he's an average sheriff that's weak on violent crimes and sexual assault. The only thing his methods are more effective at is killing prisoners under his care.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 09:59 AM
link   

AngryCymraeg

madmac5150
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 

Spoken like a true Obama kool-aid drinker... Arpaio has something the idiots in DC haven't figured out yet. Common sense.


He's a Birther. No common sense there at all. Man's a cretin and loves to jump on any bandwagon he can see.


Common sense is denied by anyone who actually thinks Obama is really an American! Funny how he has no living relatives from the United States, no child hood friends and not to mention our inability to see any of his records (medical, educational, etc.). LOL, yeah, he's an American, all right! And I've got a piece of beach front property to sell you in Kansas.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Donkey_Dean
 


He is an evil SOB and can run with the big dogs. Why is it he continues to get elected or is the Sherriff in Maricopa County an appointed position? It's too bad there are hundreds like him in similar or even higher positions throughout the land.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


So if he wasn't born in America where was he born? Where is the evidence that he was born outside America? I eagerly await your posting of the same birther tripe that was debunked years ago.



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


I live in Arizona.

My thoughts on Joe. I agree with some things disagree with others.

We do have a real problem here with illegal immigration. I live at the tip of amnesty trail, so I know.
They already have gangs from Mexico that live in these towns, and have seen some serious crimes.

I run a crime page for my town, and I save the crime reports every week. A lot of people that are arrested for drugs and violence are from Mexico.

The left, opens lawsuits and hopes that it take enough of Arizona's money, so that the voters will back down. I do not like extortion.

On the other hand, the jail he runs, are in need of serious help. The medical care over there is horrible. Just google jail deaths, in his jails, from abuse, to lack of medical care, to withholding prescribed meds.

God forbid I ever ended up in his jails, with the meds I am on, Id be dead in a week if they were withheld. Makes me wonder what his stance on medical care would be.

He would stand against the feds, yes. Would he stand for the people here though? I have my doubts. I think he would cut money from everything he could, and a lot of things the state needs. So I would say no to him being Governor.


edit on 24-1-2014 by amatrine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by madmac5150
 


Arpio defines the term 'corupt'. He's just one more nation embarrassment for AZ. Can't wait for this hypocrit to retire, permanently.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join